Re: The CHANGES file

cmpilato@collab.net wrote:
> Tobias Ringstrom <tobias@ringstrom.mine.nu> writes:
>
>>Why is the CHANGES file referring to a branch and not a tag?
>
> Because at the time the CHANGES file is edited, there is no tag. And
> after the tag is created, you can't edit the CHANGES file (duh, it's a
> tag). :-)

I could say that at the time the CHANGES file is edited, you do not
know what the repository revision will be when you commit the change.

The difference is that you *know* what the tag name will be, but you
have to *guess* the repository revision. Sure, if the repository is
lightly used, and you are a fast typer, you will probably guess right,
but come on. Guess? That does not feel right. In my world, knowing
beats guessing.

I also think that referring to a tag is better than referring to a
branch+revision for a number of other reasons:

1. It's a single thing, not two.

2. You can browse the code using a normal web browser. The branch
    is deleted from HEAD when the tag is created.

3. It's conceptually better. The tag is what's interesting, and
    the branch is only a "tool" to create the tag.

But it's not the end of the world of course. :-)

/Tobias

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Aug 27 09:29:11 2003